Our server costs ~$56 per month to run. Please consider donating or becoming a Patron to help keep the site running. Help us gain new members by following us on Twitter and liking our page on Facebook!
Drich Wrote:I haven't found one yet, but if one such example should exist I would say that it is their to help facilitate the reasonable doubt you all need to justify your seperation from God.
I'm sorry, but you're being fallacious. Ultimately your aim is obviously to prove the Bible is infallible, but when presented the facts that it has been edited and added to, you use the thing you're trying to prove to show that somehow these errors don't matter because the book says it's 'the word of god'.
The two creation accounts
Were the plants created during the 6 days or not?
Genesis 1:11,12
Then God said, “Let the land produce vegetation: seed-bearing plants and trees on the land that bear fruit with seed in it, according to their various kinds.” And it was so. The land produced vegetation: plants bearing seed according to their kinds and trees bearing fruit with seed in it according to their kinds. And God saw that it was good.
Genesis 2:5,6
Now no shrub had yet appeared on the earth and no plant had yet sprung up, for the Lord God had not sent rain on the earth and there was no one to work the ground, but streams came up from the earth and watered the whole surface of the ground.
Man gets created twice
Genesis 1:26
Then God said, “Let us make mankind in our image, in our likeness, so that they may rule over the fish in the sea and the birds in the sky, over the livestock and all the wild animals, and over all the creatures that move along the ground.”
Genesis 2:7
Then the Lord God formed a man from the dust of the ground and breathed into his nostrils the breath of life, and the man became a living being.
Were the animals created during the 6 days or not?
Genesis 1:20
And God said, “Let the water teem with living creatures, and let birds fly above the earth across the vault of the sky.”
Genesis 2:19
Now the Lord God had formed out of the ground all the wild animals and all the birds in the sky...
Quote:Again this life is about Choice. If we have undoubtable proof then 'we' no longer have a choice.
Agreed. There needs to be choice for true faith to happen, but even before we get to this conclusion you need to show me why the Bible is infallible. That means you need to explain things such as how Moses could write about his own death in Deuteronomy 34.
Quote:Eternal life is not the Only goal. a life worth living eternally is. we are given tasks and reward in balance to our faithfulness to what we have been exposed to. Neither are possiable if one is has not been exposed to the truth of God's word.
What about all the young children that die who didn't have a developed-enough mind to understand salvation? Heaven or hell?
Quote:One does not have to like the difference between 'right and wrong' to submit to it.
So do you or do you not believe that women should stay quiet in church, not embarrass themselves by asking questions and leave that for when they get home and ask their husbands?
"It is the mark of an educated mind to be able to entertain a thought without accepting it" ~ Aristotle
(September 29, 2012 at 10:15 pm)FallentoReason Wrote: I'm sorry, but you're being fallacious. Ultimately your aim is obviously to prove the Bible is infallible, but when presented the facts that it has been edited and added to, you use the thing you're trying to prove to show that somehow these errors don't matter because the book says it's 'the word of god'.
If God put intentional 'facts' in the bible that help facilitate a desision no matter the out come then doesn't that allow the bible to be used as a tool just like He orginally intended? If the bible is being used as God intended then how is it deemed falliable?
I see the perfection of God's word in the fact that no matter what you think of it, it is being used as God intended. Which makes God's word perfect and complete.
The two creation accounts[hide] Were the plants created during the 6 days or not?
Genesis 1:11,12
Then God said, “Let the land produce vegetation: seed-bearing plants and trees on the land that bear fruit with seed in it, according to their various kinds.” And it was so. The land produced vegetation: plants bearing seed according to their kinds and trees bearing fruit with seed in it according to their kinds. And God saw that it was good.
Genesis 2:5,6
Now no shrub had yet appeared on the earth and no plant had yet sprung up, for the Lord God had not sent rain on the earth and there was no one to work the ground, but streams came up from the earth and watered the whole surface of the ground.
Quote:Genesis 1:26
Then God said, “Let us make mankind in our image, in our likeness, so that they may rule over the fish in the sea and the birds in the sky, over the livestock and all the wild animals, and over all the creatures that move along the ground.”
Genesis 2:7
Then the Lord God formed a man from the dust of the ground and breathed into his nostrils the breath of life, and the man became a living being.
Were the animals created during the 6 days or not?
Genesis 1:20
And God said, “Let the water teem with living creatures, and let birds fly above the earth across the vault of the sky.”
Genesis 2:19
Now the Lord God had formed out of the ground all the wild animals and all the birds in the sky...
the only failure here is in the comperhension of how a traditional Jewish naritive was compiled. Or do you really and honestly think the writer of this passage did not orginally see the continuity errors the website you C&P from did?
In Traditional Jewish story telling the audience does not want to hear a story in chronical logical order as we do. They want to hear all of the major points of a story, and then the story teller is expected to come back and fill in the details. So in Genesis 1 you have the typical overview, and then then a more detailed account that follows. remember the orginal account was not subdivided into Book Chapter and Verse.
Quote:Agreed. There needs to be choice for true faith to happen, but even before we get to this conclusion you need to show me why the Bible is infallible.
Actually i don't. This is God's job. The quickest way for Him to do this is for you is to follow/take God up on the promises He has offered to us.
Quote: That means you need to explain things such as how Moses could write about his own death in Deuteronomy 34.
Then you need to show me where the pentatuch was only written by Moses. Or are you mixing church tradition with the bible interchangably?
Quote:What about all the young children that die who didn't have a developed-enough mind to understand salvation? Heaven or hell?
Honestly the bible does not say. But my best guess? I would say if this life is about choice and a childs life is taken before he was old enough to make that desision then I would think God would give the child another chance to live a life and make said desision.
Quote:So do you or do you not believe that women should stay quiet in church, not embarrass themselves by asking questions and leave that for when they get home and ask their husbands?
I do not see gender when questions are asked I only see a hungery soul looking to be nourshied. For all I know you are a female and I have readily provided an answer to your questions. I have done this for the known males and females in this Forum. I have also taught classes and had women ask questions, and i have answered them. Even so, I do and can see why this can be considered to be a problem.
As you can imagine my 'take' on christianity does not fit most denominational doctrines. In one instance I said something that contradicted this womans beliefs and she asked a question i quickly returned with a biblical answer, to which it became very personal to her and counted it as a personal attack against her when I corrected her theology. I did not mean any disrespect to her personally even though she took it that way. I then spent the rest of my time trying to calm her back down. In that instance this woman needed the personal attention her husband could have given her.
Likewise my wife was apart of a similar situation and was 'corrected.' to which she got very angry at how she was 'corrected.' I wished that she just asked me, but at the same time i have no issue with her engauging herself in a given study if she can leave her pride at the door.
That said I know what the bible says, and I know what i have done is wrong. No appologies no excuses. i am now subject to the same grace and attonement that covers all other sin. If not then I will have Hell to pay for my actions.
(September 29, 2012 at 10:15 pm)FallentoReason Wrote: I'm sorry, but you're being fallacious. Ultimately your aim is obviously to prove the Bible is infallible, but when presented the facts that it has been edited and added to, you use the thing you're trying to prove to show that somehow these errors don't matter because the book says it's 'the word of god'.
If God put intentional 'facts' in the bible that help facilitate a desision no matter the out come then doesn't that allow the bible to be used as a tool just like He orginally intended? If the bible is being used as God intended then how is it deemed falliable?
I see the perfection of God's word in the fact that no matter what you think of it, it is being used as God intended. Which makes God's word perfect and complete.
What? God didn't put these 'facts' into the bible, people did. The fact that the original message of the bible has been added to or edited makes the bible falliable, even if it were infalliable to begin with, which it was not. How do you know god wanted the bible to be a 'tool'? Does it say so in the bible? How do you know he approves of it being used incorrectly? How is it perfect even when it is flawed simply because it is being used as a tool? In fact, a flawed bible is worse than no bible.
Drich Wrote:The two creation accounts Were the plants created during the 6 days or not?
Genesis 1:11,12
Then God said, “Let the land produce vegetation: seed-bearing plants and trees on the land that bear fruit with seed in it, according to their various kinds.” And it was so. The land produced vegetation: plants bearing seed according to their kinds and trees bearing fruit with seed in it according to their kinds. And God saw that it was good.
Genesis 2:5,6
Now no shrub had yet appeared on the earth and no plant had yet sprung up, for the Lord God had not sent rain on the earth and there was no one to work the ground, but streams came up from the earth and watered the whole surface of the ground.
Quote:Genesis 1:26
Then God said, “Let us make mankind in our image, in our likeness, so that they may rule over the fish in the sea and the birds in the sky, over the livestock and all the wild animals, and over all the creatures that move along the ground.”
Genesis 2:7
Then the Lord God formed a man from the dust of the ground and breathed into his nostrils the breath of life, and the man became a living being.
Were the animals created during the 6 days or not?
Genesis 1:20
And God said, “Let the water teem with living creatures, and let birds fly above the earth across the vault of the sky.”
Genesis 2:19
Now the Lord God had formed out of the ground all the wild animals and all the birds in the sky...
the only failure here is in the comperhension of how a traditional Jewish naritive was compiled. Or do you really and honestly think the writer of this passage did not orginally see the continuity errors the website you C&P from did?
In Traditional Jewish story telling the audience does not want to hear a story in chronical logical order as we do. They want to hear all of the major points of a story, and then the story teller is expected to come back and fill in the details. So in Genesis 1 you have the typical overview, and then then a more detailed account that follows. remember the orginal account was not subdivided into Book Chapter and Verse.
The two accounts contradict each other. One is not simply a deeper form of the other. I have no idea how you came to the conclusion that 'traditional jewish storytelling' would permit obvious contradictions.
Drich Wrote:
Quote:Agreed. There needs to be choice for true faith to happen, but even before we get to this conclusion you need to show me why the Bible is infallible.
Actually i don't. This is God's job. The quickest way for Him to do this is for you is to follow/take God up on the promises He has offered to us.
Well, god hasn't done his job the, has he? The only promises god gives us are of heaven and hell, which we can't test. If the bible contradicts itself, it is not infalliable, end of story.
Drich Wrote:
Quote:What about all the young children that die who didn't have a developed-enough mind to understand salvation? Heaven or hell?
Honestly the bible does not say. But my best guess? I would say if this life is about choice and a childs life is taken before he was old enough to make that desision then I would think God would give the child another chance to live a life and make said desision.
Again, belief or lack of belief in a diety is not choice, it just happens. If someone threatened to kill you if you did not believe in unicorns, you would tell them you did, but you would not actually believe, If they could read your mind, you would die, as you cannot will yourself to believe something so contrary to reality, unless you already have some belief in it.
Drich Wrote:
Quote:So do you or do you not believe that women should stay quiet in church, not embarrass themselves by asking questions and leave that for when they get home and ask their husbands?
I do not see gender when questions are asked I only see a hungery soul looking to be nourshied. For all I know you are a female and I have readily provided an answer to your questions. I have done this for the known males and females in this Forum. I have also taught classes and had women ask questions, and i have answered them. Even so, I do and can see why this can be considered to be a problem.
As you can imagine my 'take' on christianity does not fit most denominational doctrines. In one instance I said something that contradicted this womans beliefs and she asked a question i quickly returned with a biblical answer, to which it became very personal to her and counted it as a personal attack against her when I corrected her theology. I did not mean any disrespect to her personally even though she took it that way. I then spent the rest of my time trying to calm her back down. In that instance this woman needed the personal attention her husband could have given her.
Likewise my wife was apart of a similar situation and was 'corrected.' to which she got very angry at how she was 'corrected.' I wished that she just asked me, but at the same time i have no issue with her engauging herself in a given study if she can leave her pride at the door.
That said I know what the bible says, and I know what i have done is wrong. No appologies no excuses. i am now subject to the same grace and attonement that covers all other sin. If not then I will have Hell to pay for my actions.
You honestly believe that it is wrong to let your wife ask other people questions just because the bible says so? I bet you would say it was okay to stone unruly children to death if the bible said...wait,the bible does say that...
John Adams Wrote:The Government of the United States of America is not, in any sense, founded on the Christian religion.
September 30, 2012 at 4:48 am (This post was last modified: September 30, 2012 at 5:00 am by FallentoReason.)
I saw the responses Darkstar gave you and I completely agree, so I won't repeat myself, except for this bit:
Drich Wrote:I do not see gender when questions are asked I only see a hungery soul looking to be nourshied. For all I know you are a female and I have readily provided an answer to your questions. I have done this for the known males and females in this Forum. I have also taught classes and had women ask questions, and i have answered them. Even so, I do and can see why this can be considered to be a problem.
As you can imagine my 'take' on christianity does not fit most denominational doctrines. In one instance I said something that contradicted this womans beliefs and she asked a question i quickly returned with a biblical answer, to which it became very personal to her and counted it as a personal attack against her when I corrected her theology. I did not mean any disrespect to her personally even though she took it that way. I then spent the rest of my time trying to calm her back down. In that instance this woman needed the personal attention her husband could have given her.
Likewise my wife was apart of a similar situation and was 'corrected.' to which she got very angry at how she was 'corrected.' I wished that she just asked me, but at the same time i have no issue with her engauging herself in a given study if she can leave her pride at the door.
That said I know what the bible says, and I know what i have done is wrong. No appologies no excuses. i am now subject to the same grace and attonement that covers all other sin. If not then I will have Hell to pay for my actions.
Correct me if I'm wrong, but it seems like you're justifying Paul's sexism by saying that women become emotionally unstable when they're shown they are wrong. I don't know how you could think that makes it any better, but we'll roll with it for now.
I don't see how you can be on Paul's side but at the same time continue to act as if it's not a part of doctrine. Why do you answer women's questions? You should point them to the "book, chapter and verse" that says what they're doing is wrong and tell them to be on their way (i.e. go ask your husband). Clearly "God's Righteousness" isn't what drives you nor is it the Holy Spirit. You have identified a man's opinion from the 1st century Roman Empire which is clearly sexist, doesn't fit into today's society and have decided to override "infallible scripture". My advice to you is to take the stance of the moral relativist. That is, accept something as morally right if, and only if, the society accepts that as being morally right. Therefore Paul's words can be said to be sexist but because that's the society he lived in, it is therefore morally right. The only problem with this view is two things:
a) It means his teachings can't be applied anymore (because our society isn't ok with sexism).
b) Hence, according to 'a' (surprise surprise) the Bible is fallible.
I don't think any other moral ethics stance can justify how it's ok for Paul to say that.
oh p.s. I'm a guy. Not that it matters really...
Oh woops, I forgot to answer this bit:
Drich Wrote:Then you need to show me where the pentatuch was only written by Moses. Or are you mixing church tradition with the bible interchangably?
Since I'm not the one making radical claims, the issue isn't with me but with you about 'interchangeability'. Clearly you see it as impossible that Moses could write Deuteronomy, but at the same time you think it's ok to accept tradition when it comes to the authorship of the Gospels. What's it going to be?
"It is the mark of an educated mind to be able to entertain a thought without accepting it" ~ Aristotle
September 30, 2012 at 12:33 pm (This post was last modified: September 30, 2012 at 1:10 pm by Drich.)
(September 29, 2012 at 11:37 pm)Darkstar Wrote: What? God didn't put these 'facts' into the bible, people did.
Do you honestly think there is anything in the bible that God does not want in it?
Quote:The fact that the original message of the bible has been added to or edited makes the bible falliable, even if it were infalliable to begin with, which it was not. How do you know god wanted the bible to be a 'tool'? Does it say so in the bible?
Yes 2tim 3:16
Quote: How do you know he approves of it being used incorrectly?
'Differently' does not mean incorrectly. I know we are allowed to view things differently and worship differently because it is spelled out in every book of the New Testament. From the different takes of what was important in the gospels. to how 'differently' Paul was brought into the ministry to each one of the different churches each book was written to. If God demanded uniformity then he would have only needed one book with christianity as He did with the Jews in deuteronomy. As it is written the New testament is a 'testament' as to the nature of the freedom we have to live and worship Christ.
Quote:How is it perfect even when it is flawed simply because it is being used as a tool? In fact, a flawed bible is worse than no bible.
That's just it. (Read this next part carfully) The bible is not Flawed. Our understanding of it is. These are the failures that people identify in the bible and attribute to God. When in fact the flaws are from our own understandings.
An intentional issue with continuity is not a flaw. Especially when the intent is to have you continually question and undermine what you think you believe. God is infinite, so why should we ever feel comfortable in what we think we know of Him or what has even been written about Him? If one is honest with Himself he will come to the realization that the more he studies the less he actually 'knows' about God. It is only the fool who thinks he has it and christianity all figured out.
Quote:The two accounts contradict each other. One is not simply a deeper form of the other. I have no idea how you came to the conclusion that 'traditional jewish storytelling' would permit obvious contradictions.
2 years of study focoused on Jewish texts.
Quote:Well, god hasn't done his job the, has he? The only promises god gives us are of heaven and hell, which we can't test.
again only the fool believes he has it all figured out.
We have been given the promise of the Holy Spirit for all who would simply ask seek and knock as outlined in luke 11. This is where a literal peice of God comes and resides with in you. Giving you the 'proof' and direction you will personally need to establish a faith and maintain it.
Quote: If the bible contradicts itself, it is not infalliable, end of story.
Then maybe you could be so good as show me a place where you have personally found such a contradiction.
Quote:You honestly believe that it is wrong to let your wife ask other people questions just because the bible says so?
Maybe read the story again and rephrase your question to reflect what i have shared.
Quote: I bet you would say it was okay to stone unruly children to death if the bible said...wait,the bible does say that...
It was ok for the people and time in whom that command was given. who are you to say otherwise?
(September 30, 2012 at 4:48 am)FallentoReason Wrote: Correct me if I'm wrong, but it seems like you're justifying Paul's sexism by saying that women become emotionally unstable when they're shown they are wrong. I don't know how you could think that makes it any better, but we'll roll with it for now.
You are wrong, and have been corrected. In that i gave two examples of women (one where I taught a class and the second where my wife attended a class) where they took personal offense when harshly corrected in front of a group of their peers.
I said I also can see the need for this type of direction given the people and time in which Paul was speaking. Plus when one factors in that he was trying to establish a new church and did not want something like infighting between a man's wife and a teacher to be come a dividing point in the church. i can truly see the need for this rule.
Don't try and boil this down to something it is not. Or I will simply correct your red herring again.
Quote:I don't see how you can be on Paul's side but at the same time continue to act as if it's not a part of doctrine.
I see This is where you are truly confused. Understand, I have not tried to justify this sin. I accept it as sin and as a willful disobediance between me and my God.
Quote: Why do you answer women's questions?
Because i see a need, and have the ablity/oppertunity to fill that need.
Quote: You should point them to the "book, chapter and verse" that says what they're doing is wrong and tell them to be on their way (i.e. go ask your husband).
In the proper setting This is exactly what I should do. (Setting being they are indeed married.)
Quote:Clearly "God's Righteousness" isn't what drives you nor is it the Holy Spirit.
Noope. Personal pride and my understanding of what it means to be faithful to what I have been given is what drives me.
Quote:You have identified a man's opinion from the 1st century Roman Empire which is clearly sexist, doesn't fit into today's society and have decided to override "infallible scripture".
Again here is where you need to be corrected. I have not justified anything. my actions are a direct result of my own willingness to sin if the face of God and what i as a christian have been commanded to do. Meaning God's word stays intact and is as perfect as it was when first written. It is my understanding of God's word and how it relates to this time and this soceity is where the contradiction lies. I am the fault in the equasion, not the bible.
Quote:My advice to you is to take the stance of the moral relativist. That is, accept something as morally right if, and only if, the society accepts that as being morally right.
if I did that then I would also have to "fall to the reasoning" of my peers. I know you may agree with that, but I like to do my own thinking for myself.
Quote:Therefore Paul's words can be said to be sexist but because that's the society he lived in, it is therefore morally right. The only problem with this view is two things:
a) It means his teachings can't be applied anymore (because our society isn't ok with sexism).
b) Hence, according to 'a' (surprise surprise) the Bible is fallible.
we've discussed this in another thread already. You are looking to the bible as a book of rules to follow to find righteousness. Which is why it is so important to you that this 'book of rules' match your current understanding of morality. Since i have already given you the long explaination I will give you the short one this time.
The only reason the 'rules' are in the bible is to show you that you can not ever hope to be righteous by following a rule based theology. The rules are there to show you that you are a sinner and nothing else. They are there to convict you of your sin. One you can accept your sin the bible points to the only way of salvation and that is through attonement for your sin. so things like the bit you thought were inconsistancies in the bible remain just as damning then as they are now. The only difference is the attonement offered covers all sin. Again this is what seperates biblical christianity from all other religions. It is not rule based, which pretty much invalidates your whole arguement.
Quote:I don't think any other moral ethics stance can justify how it's ok for Paul to say that.
Morality That's the whole issue isn't it? You think we are to be moral and that somehow that warrants eternal life. Ahh, no. This is why i say over and over morality or our "good deeds" are like dirty menstral rags (is the actual translation) to God. Our 'morality' truly, TRULY counts for nothing on it own merrit.
Quote:oh p.s. I'm a guy. Not that it matters really...
Good to know that you are not a stumbling block.
Quote:Since I'm not the one making radical claims, the issue isn't with me but with you about 'interchangeability'. Clearly you see it as impossible that Moses could write Deuteronomy, but at the same time you think it's ok to accept tradition when it comes to the authorship of the Gospels. What's it going to be?
Moses set up the Levitical lines of preists and scribes. Who do you think copied and transcribed what had been orginall written? how is it not possiable to think that one such scribe/high preist saw a need to close out the account of Moses?
September 30, 2012 at 3:14 pm (This post was last modified: September 30, 2012 at 3:19 pm by Darkstar.)
(September 30, 2012 at 12:33 pm)Drich Wrote: Do you honestly think there is anything in the bible that God does not want in it?
People have changed the bible over the years. If god wants all of the racism and sexism to be a part of the bible then we have a problem.
Drich Wrote:'Differently' does not mean incorrectly. I know we are allowed to view things differently and worship differently because it is spelled out in every book of the New Testament. From the different takes of what was important in the gospels. to how 'differently' Paul was brought into the ministry to each one of the different churches each book was written to. If God demanded uniformity then he would have only needed one book with christianity as He did with the Jews in deuteronomy. As it is written the New testament is a 'testament' as to the nature of the freedom we have to live and worship Christ.
That doesn't explain why people can use the bible to justify evil. Does god want evil? How do you explain this:
Suppose you hear in one of the towns the LORD your God is giving you that some worthless rabble among you have led their fellow citizens astray by encouraging them to worship foreign gods. In such cases, you must examine the facts carefully. If you find it is true and can prove that such a detestable act has occurred among you, you must attack that town and completely destroy all its inhabitants, as well as all the livestock. Then you must pile all the plunder in the middle of the street and burn it. Put the entire town to the torch as a burnt offering to the LORD your God. That town must remain a ruin forever; it may never be rebuilt. Keep none of the plunder that has been set apart for destruction. Then the LORD will turn from his fierce anger and be merciful to you. He will have compassion on you and make you a great nation, just as he solemnly promised your ancestors. "The LORD your God will be merciful only if you obey him and keep all the commands I am giving you today, doing what is pleasing to him." (Deuteronomy 13:13-19 NLT)
That is justification for the crusades. I think it would be very important as to whether or not people followed the teaching in that passage.
Drich Wrote:
Quote:How is it perfect even when it is flawed simply because it is being used as a tool? In fact, a flawed bible is worse than no bible.
That's just it. (Read this next part carfully) The bible is not Flawed. Our understanding of it is. These are the failures that people identify in the bible and attribute to God. When in fact the flaws are from our own understandings.
An intentional issue with continuity is not a flaw. Especially when the intent is to have you continually question and undermine what you think you believe. God is infinite, so why should we ever feel comfortable in what we think we know of Him or what has even been written about Him? If one is honest with Himself he will come to the realization that the more he studies the less he actually 'knows' about God. It is only the fool who thinks he has it and christianity all figured out.
(bolding mine)
So what you are sying is that god deliberately put errors in the bible, and because they were intentional they are not real errors? Then you go on to the whole 'mystery of god' thing where you say that no one can understand god so we must just be stupid for not knowing why he purposely put mistakes in the bible...
Drich Wrote:
Quote:The two accounts contradict each other. One is not simply a deeper form of the other. I have no idea how you came to the conclusion that 'traditional jewish storytelling' would permit obvious contradictions.
2 years of study focoused on Jewish texts.
That doesn't really answer the question. It would be like saying I came to the conclusion that 10 x 10 = 100 because of math class.
Drich Wrote:
Quote:Well, god hasn't done his job the, has he? The only promises god gives us are of heaven and hell, which we can't test.
again only the fool believes he has it all figured out.
We have been given the promise of the Holy Spirit for all who would simply ask seek and knock as outlined in luke 11. This is where a literal peice of God comes and resides with in you. Giving you the 'proof' and direction you will personally need to establish a faith and maintain it.
...? So...the bible is still full of holes, but you trust a bible passage to tell you that you will recieve 'proof' of the bible's validity from an undetectable entity? I don't suppose you have any evidence for this other than your personal credulity.
Drich Wrote:
Quote: If the bible contradicts itself, it is not infalliable, end of story.
Then maybe you could be so good as show me a place where you have personally found such a contradiction.
Quote:You honestly believe that it is wrong to let your wife ask other people questions just because the bible says so?
Maybe read the story again and rephrase your question to reflect what i have shared.
You would don't personally think it is wrong, but feel guilty for not thinking this because you are a slave to the bible (as you openly admitted in a pervious post).
Drich Wrote:
Quote: I bet you would say it was okay to stone unruly children to death if the bible said...wait,the bible does say that...
It was ok for the people and time in whom that command was given. who are you to say otherwise?
I don't know, maybe someone with at least a single moral bone in my body. It may have been socially acceptable at the time, but that doesn't make it right. Likewise, the rule isn't objectively moral if it was only right for the time. Therefore, the bible fails at providing objective morality.
Drich Wrote:
Quote:I don't see how you can be on Paul's side but at the same time continue to act as if it's not a part of doctrine.
I see This is where you are truly confused. Understand, I have not tried to justify this sin. I accept it as sin and as a willful disobediance between me and my God.
Then you are justifying it! You refuse to reject it, or anything else in the bible because you are a sheep, blindly following god's will, regardless of if it is right or wrong.
Drich Wrote:
Quote:Clearly "God's Righteousness" isn't what drives you nor is it the Holy Spirit.
Noope. Personal pride and my understanding of what it means to be faithful to what I have been given is what drives me.
Correct me if I'm wrong, but isn't personal pride what drove Lucifer to rebel, according to the bible? I thought personal pride, or really anything that doesn't make you feel like a worthless and disgusting abomination of nature was frowned upon by the church.
Drich Wrote:
Quote:You have identified a man's opinion from the 1st century Roman Empire which is clearly sexist, doesn't fit into today's society and have decided to override "infallible scripture".
Again here is where you need to be corrected. I have not justified anything. my actions are a direct result of my own willingness to sin if the face of God and what i as a christian have been commanded to do. Meaning God's word stays intact and is as perfect as it was when first written. It is my understanding of God's word and how it relates to this time and this soceity is where the contradiction lies. I am the fault in the equasion, not the bible.
If you truly believe that, then there is no more hope for you...
Drich Wrote:
Quote:My advice to you is to take the stance of the moral relativist. That is, accept something as morally right if, and only if, the society accepts that as being morally right.
if I did that then I would also have to "fall to the reasoning" of my peers. I know you may agree with that, but I like to do my own thinking for myself.
(bolding mine) Sorry, I couldn't resist. I don't think any other response is appropriate at this point.(wait... I don't drink coffee)
Drich Wrote:
Quote:Therefore Paul's words can be said to be sexist but because that's the society he lived in, it is therefore morally right. The only problem with this view is two things:
a) It means his teachings can't be applied anymore (because our society isn't ok with sexism).
b) Hence, according to 'a' (surprise surprise) the Bible is fallible.
we've discussed this in another thread already. You are looking to the bible as a book of rules to follow to find righteousness. Which is why it is so important to you that this 'book of rules' match your current understanding of morality.
But...it doesn't match our current understanding of morality.
Drich Wrote:The only reason the 'rules' are in the bible is to show you that you can not ever hope to be righteous by following a rule based theology.
So the bible is deliberately flawed...but why?
Drich Wrote:The rules are there to show you that you are a sinner and nothing else.
Oh, to destroy your sense of self-worth, something religions seem to love doing.
Drich Wrote:They are there to convict you of your sin. One you can accept your sin the bible points to the only way of salvation and that is through attonement for your sin.
More shaming.
Drich Wrote:so things like the bit you thought were inconsistancies in the bible remain just as damning then as they are now. The only difference is the attonement offered covers all sin. Again this is what seperates biblical christianity from all other religions. It is not rule based, which pretty much invalidates your whole arguement.
If there are no rules, then what were the ten commandments for?
Drich Wrote:
Quote:I don't think any other moral ethics stance can justify how it's ok for Paul to say that.
Morality That's the whole issue isn't it? You think we are to be moral and that somehow that warrants eternal life. Ahh, no. This is why i say over and over morality or our "good deeds" are like dirty menstral rags (is the actual translation) to God. Our 'morality' truly, TRULY counts for nothing on it own merrit.
Translation: Do anything evil you want, just ask god for forgiveness later and accept Jesus. Who cares about morals!?!
John Adams Wrote:The Government of the United States of America is not, in any sense, founded on the Christian religion.
(September 30, 2012 at 3:14 pm)Darkstar Wrote: People have changed the bible over the years.
If you have ever studied the bible you would know they haven't. Especially since we found the dead sea scrolls. I can post stats if you are interested.
Quote:If god wants all of the racism and sexism to be a part of the bible then we have a problem.
It would seem the problem is yours. Because your 'morality' has taken you so far from God's righteousness, does not mean God's standard is any less valid.
Quote:That doesn't explain why people can use the bible to justify evil. Does god want evil?
Two things Evil is not justified, but at the same time what you may see as evil doesn't mean evil is being committed. The bible defines evil as a malicious intention to be outside of the expressed will of God.
Quote:How do you explain this:
Suppose you hear in one of the towns the LORD your God is giving you that some worthless rabble among you have led their fellow citizens astray by encouraging them to worship foreign gods. In such cases, you must examine the facts carefully. If you find it is true and can prove that such a detestable act has occurred among you, you must attack that town and completely destroy all its inhabitants, as well as all the livestock. Then you must pile all the plunder in the middle of the street and burn it. Put the entire town to the torch as a burnt offering to the LORD your God. That town must remain a ruin forever; it may never be rebuilt. Keep none of the plunder that has been set apart for destruction. Then the LORD will turn from his fierce anger and be merciful to you. He will have compassion on you and make you a great nation, just as he solemnly promised your ancestors. "The LORD your God will be merciful only if you obey him and keep all the commands I am giving you today, doing what is pleasing to him." (Deuteronomy 13:13-19 NLT)
That God gave the OT Jews who Deu 13 was written to a direct command to destroy all the things in a given town.
Quote:That is justification for the crusades. I think it would be very important as to whether or not people followed the teaching in that passage.
We can justify whatever we like with what ever passage we want that does not mean God endorses the act. Again God gave a very specific command to a very specific act of people living a very specific time frame. To use this command set to these people and apply it to your own agenda is not an act of God. We know this instance was a specific command for a specific people because God's commands varied from town to town region to region depending on how corrupt a given people were. We also know that it was forbidden to attack or war against a people without a direct word from God. God's words for a physical war have never been given to Christians. We are called to a spiritual war.
Quote:So what you are sying is that god deliberately put errors in the bible, and because they were intentional they are not real errors?
No. I am saying what appears to be a mistake in the bible is your own flawed understanding of what the bible says.
God put it there so you would constantly be challenging what you think you know about Christianity about God..
Quote:Then you go on to the whole 'mystery of god' thing where you say that no one can understand god
ah, no. we can understand what has been revealed, but nothing more.
(bold is yours) so we must just be stupid for thinking you have a complete understanding of God with the sunday school exposure your approaching Him with.
Quote: for not knowing why he purposely put mistakes in the bible...
Again the mistakes are not in the bible, but in your understanding of it. The reason you do not know this is because you do not ask seek or knock.
Quote:That doesn't really answer the question. It would be like saying I came to the conclusion that 10 x 10 = 100 because of math class.
Then do a google search. what do you want from me? Do i have to predigest everything for you? I gave you a fact that is easily verfiable.. So verify it, accept it, or ignore it. BTW if you asked why 10x10=100 I would have told you the same. for I am not here to teach math, like I am not here to teach jewish tradition, especially when if you have access to this website you have access to google.
Quote:...? So...the bible is still full of holes, but you trust a bible passage to tell you that you will recieve 'proof' of the bible's validity from an undetectable entity? I don't suppose you have any evidence for this other than your personal credulity.
The evidence comes when you foolow the path God has commanded you to walk. Untill you do this you WILL remain in the dark. You do not have the capasity to understand otherwise.
so these are your websites and are a direct result of YOUR own personal study? Because that is what I asked of you. To show me a contradiction you found to be true.
Quote:You would don't personally think it is wrong, but feel guilty for not thinking this because you are a slave to the bible (as you openly admitted in a pervious post).
I am a slave to God and the bible yes. I personally do not see this as wrong, no. I do not feel bad. As I have said I make no excuses. I know I am in sin and continue on anyway. For this I am at God's mercy to forgive me for not being able to resolve this conflict, and siding with my own understanding rather than defaulting with Him.
Quote:I don't know, maybe someone with at least a single moral bone in my body. It may have been socially acceptable at the time, but that doesn't make it right. Likewise, the rule isn't objectively moral if it was only right for the time. Therefore, the bible fails at providing objective morality.
The bible does not give all of the reason why God called for the complete destruction of these people. We do not know all of the personal accounts of what they did or what they would have done if allowed to live. Objective 'morality' requires all of the facts in order to render a proper judgement. You do not have all of the facts but still make the judgement under the pretext of 'objective morality.'
Quote:Then you are justifying it! You refuse to reject it, or anything else in the bible because you are a sheep, blindly following god's will, regardless of if it is right or wrong.
Baaaaa (the sound a sheep makes)
Oh, the irony. I am told by God what right and wrong is and I do not question it, and you are told what right and wrong is by your peers/your soceity and you do not question it. I am a sheep, but so are you! Baaaa!
Quote:Correct me if I'm wrong, but isn't personal pride what drove Lucifer to rebel, according to the bible?
yep.
Quote: I thought personal pride, or really anything that doesn't make you feel like a worthless and disgusting abomination of nature was frowned upon by the church.
Pride is a sin but it's not the unforgivable sin. There is redemption for pride for all who seek it.
Quote:If you truly believe that, then there is no more hope for you...
(in my best Adam Sandberg/Nick Cage impression) "That's high Praise!"
Quote:But...it doesn't match our current understanding of morality.
God's standard hasn't Changed, but you report a change in your morality away from God. Where do you think the fault lies?
Quote: Oh, to destroy your sense of self-worth, something religions seem to love doing.
The word you are looking for is self righteousness. The Law is there to destroy your sense of Self Righteousness. Meaning the Law shows you that your 'morality' or sense of "righteousness" is not a valid way to measure yourself as worthy of eternal life.
Quote:More shaming.
The bible is identifying a problem, and then provides a solution.
Quote:If there are no rules, then what were the ten commandments for?
For the Jews to live by. To show us we fail with our understanding of 'morality.'
Quote:Translation: Do anything evil you want, just ask god for forgiveness later and accept Jesus. Who cares about morals!?!
Actually it says to love God with all of your being and then do whatever you want who cares about 'morality.'
;P
September 30, 2012 at 9:13 pm (This post was last modified: September 30, 2012 at 9:21 pm by Darkstar.)
(September 30, 2012 at 8:35 pm)Drich Wrote: If you have ever studied the bible you would know they haven't. Especially since we found the dead sea scrolls. I can post stats if you are interested.
Quote:If god wants all of the racism and sexism to be a part of the bible then we have a problem.
It would seem the problem is yours. Because your 'morality' has taken you so far from God's righteousness, does not mean God's standard is any less valid.
Yeah, actually, it does. These aren't god's standards because god doesn't exist. These are the archaic moral values of the ancient people who wrote the bible.
Drich Wrote:
Quote:That doesn't explain why people can use the bible to justify evil. Does god want evil?
Two things Evil is not justified, but at the same time what you may see as evil doesn't mean evil is being committed. The bible defines evil as a malicious intention to be outside of the expressed will of God.
In other words, evil is only that which opposes god, and good is only that which god permits. Too bad he isn't real and those values were recorded by morally backward people.
Drich Wrote:
Quote:How do you explain this:
Suppose you hear in one of the towns the LORD your God is giving you that some worthless rabble among you have led their fellow citizens astray by encouraging them to worship foreign gods. In such cases, you must examine the facts carefully. If you find it is true and can prove that such a detestable act has occurred among you, you must attack that town and completely destroy all its inhabitants, as well as all the livestock. Then you must pile all the plunder in the middle of the street and burn it. Put the entire town to the torch as a burnt offering to the LORD your God. That town must remain a ruin forever; it may never be rebuilt. Keep none of the plunder that has been set apart for destruction. Then the LORD will turn from his fierce anger and be merciful to you. He will have compassion on you and make you a great nation, just as he solemnly promised your ancestors. "The LORD your God will be merciful only if you obey him and keep all the commands I am giving you today, doing what is pleasing to him." (Deuteronomy 13:13-19 NLT)
That God gave the OT Jews who Deu 13 was written to a direct command to destroy all the things in a given town.
(bolding added)
Nope, not a specific command, but a general and standing one.
Drich Wrote:
Quote:That is justification for the crusades. I think it would be very important as to whether or not people followed the teaching in that passage.
We can justify whatever we like with what ever passage we want that does not mean God endorses the act. Again God gave a very specific command to a very specific act of people living a very specific time frame. To use this command set to these people and apply it to your own agenda is not an act of God. We know this instance was a specific command for a specific people because God's commands varied from town to town region to region depending on how corrupt a given people were. We also know that it was forbidden to attack or war against a people without a direct word from God. God's words for a physical war have never been given to Christians. We are called to a spiritual war.
Spiritual war=kill people of other religions
You know, god hasn't told anyone to do anything for 2000+ years, so without a specific command, we cannot interpret his past words to mean anything. Doesn't that mean the whole bible is invalid by your logic?
Drich Wrote:
Quote:So what you are sying is that god deliberately put errors in the bible, and because they were intentional they are not real errors?
No. I am saying what appears to be a mistake in the bible is your own flawed understanding of what the bible says.
God put it there so you would constantly be challenging what you think you know about Christianity about God..
Finding contradictions does not mean I have a flawed understanding, it means the bible is flawed.
Drich Wrote:
Quote:Then you go on to the whole 'mystery of god' thing where you say that no one can understand god
ah, no. we can understand what has been revealed, but nothing more.
You, just said that we can't really understand it/our understanding is flawed and now you say we can understand it?
Drich Wrote:
Quote: for not knowing why he purposely put mistakes in the bible...
Again the mistakes are not in the bible, but in your understanding of it. The reason you do not know this is because you do not ask seek or knock.
Funny, because some people on this forum were christian for decades before deconverting and never got any sign. You talk of seeking, asking, and knocking, but this is only a metaphor; a metaphor that you have repeatedly failed to define. The seeking and asking can be inferred, but what is this metaphorical knocking? How long must one wait after doing these things beforew they can understand anything?
Drich Wrote:
Quote:That doesn't really answer the question. It would be like saying I came to the conclusion that 10 x 10 = 100 because of math class.
Then do a google search. what do you want from me? Do i have to predigest everything for you? I gave you a fact that is easily verfiable.. So verify it, accept it, or ignore it. BTW if you asked why 10x10=100 I would have told you the same. for I am not here to teach math, like I am not here to teach jewish tradition, especially when if you have access to this website you have access to google.
So what you expect me to believe is that traditional Jewish storytellers told two versions of a story that deliberately contradicted each other?
Drich Wrote:
Quote:...? So...the bible is still full of holes, but you trust a bible passage to tell you that you will recieve 'proof' of the bible's validity from an undetectable entity? I don't suppose you have any evidence for this other than your personal credulity.
The evidence comes when you foolow the path God has commanded you to walk. Untill you do this you WILL remain in the dark. You do not have the capasity to understand otherwise.
You clearly don't understand, or else you would have explained it, rather than dodging the question (again).
so these are your websites and are a direct result of YOUR own personal study? Because that is what I asked of you. To show me a contradiction you found to be true.
You know what, Drich? Why don't you go and learn everything the human race has ever learned from scratch. Don't read history books, go to the places where these events happened, do some archeology, and then give me your findings. Or better: look in the bible to confirm these. I could have found contradictions myself, or I could have posted a link to someone who already did. Which is more time efficient, and which will find more contradictions? The websites.
Drich Wrote:
Quote:You would don't personally think it is wrong, but feel guilty for not thinking this because you are a slave to the bible (as you openly admitted in a pervious post).
I am a slave to God and the bible yes. I personally do not see this as wrong, no. I do not feel bad. As I have said I make no excuses. I know I am in sin and continue on anyway. For this I am at God's mercy to forgive me for not being able to resolve this conflict, and siding with my own understanding rather than defaulting with Him.
Maybe there is no conflict. Maybe you didn't do anything wrong, and the church has you brainwashed. That much is abundantly obvious to everyone here by now, I'm sure (except for you).
Drich Wrote:
Quote:I don't know, maybe someone with at least a single moral bone in my body. It may have been socially acceptable at the time, but that doesn't make it right. Likewise, the rule isn't objectively moral if it was only right for the time. Therefore, the bible fails at providing objective morality.
The bible does not give all of the reason why God called for the complete destruction of these people. We do not know all of the personal accounts of what they did or what they would have done if allowed to live. Objective 'morality' requires all of the facts in order to render a proper judgement. You do not have all of the facts but still make the judgement under the pretext of 'objective morality.'
You do not have any of the facts, but blindly take 'god's' word for it.
Drich Wrote:
Quote:Then you are justifying it! You refuse to reject it, or anything else in the bible because you are a sheep, blindly following god's will, regardless of if it is right or wrong.
Baaaaa (the sound a sheep makes)
Oh, the irony. I am told by God what right and wrong is and I do not question it, and you are told what right and wrong is by your peers/your soceity and you do not question it. I am a sheep, but so are you! Baaaa!
Peers, as in plural. Not everyone agrees on what is right and wrong (allthough there are some basic points of agreement, such as murder, etc.). The golden rule is a good start for morality, likewise, it is good to determine if an action will hurt others/what will cause the greatest amount of happiness for the greatest number of people, etc. We are allowed to make moral choices, you are not.
Drich Wrote:
Quote:Correct me if I'm wrong, but isn't personal pride what drove Lucifer to rebel, according to the bible?
yep.
Quote: I thought personal pride, or really anything that doesn't make you feel like a worthless and disgusting abomination of nature was frowned upon by the church.
Pride is a sin but it's not the unforgivable sin. There is redemption for pride for all who seek it.
So, by sinning, you are able to be confident in your understanding of the bible?
Drich Wrote:
Quote:If you truly believe that, then there is no more hope for you...
(in my best Adam Sandberg/Nick Cage impression) "That's high Praise!"
Drich Wrote:
Quote:But...it doesn't match our current understanding of morality.
God's standard hasn't Changed, but you report a change in your morality away from God. Where do you think the fault lies?
In whoever made up god with such bad morals.
Drich Wrote:
Quote: Oh, to destroy your sense of self-worth, something religions seem to love doing.
The word you are looking for is self righteousness. The Law is there to destroy your sense of Self Righteousness. Meaning the Law shows you that your 'morality' or sense of "righteousness" is not a valid way to measure yourself as worthy of eternal life.
Quote:More shaming.
The bible is identifying a problem, and then provides a solution.
Problem: people have self-esteem and a sense of self-worth. If they consider themselves to be anything more than dirty little sinners, they won't blindly follow us, begging for redemtion from a punishment we made up.
Drich Wrote:
Quote:If there are no rules, then what were the ten commandments for?
For the Jews to live by. To show us we fail with our understanding of 'morality.'
But...god made the ten commandments. That was his understanding of morality.
Drich Wrote:
Quote:Translation: Do anything evil you want, just ask god for forgiveness later and accept Jesus. Who cares about morals!?!
Actually it says to love God with all of your being and then do whatever you want who cares about 'morality.'
;P
John Adams Wrote:The Government of the United States of America is not, in any sense, founded on the Christian religion.
September 30, 2012 at 10:59 pm (This post was last modified: September 30, 2012 at 11:00 pm by Drich.)
(September 30, 2012 at 9:13 pm)Darkstar Wrote: What about translation errors?
again 'translation' does not change the content of the orginal text does it. Your arguement supports my orginal assertion. In that the errors assoceiated with the bible are a matter of our personal understanding of it.
Quote: How about this:
Tea simply translated one word in a text to change the meaning while retaining the rest of the translation. Smoke and mirrors.
Quote:Yeah, actually, it does. These aren't god's standards because god doesn't exist.
So you have said.. which seems to be predicated on your faith.
Quote: These are the archaic moral values of the ancient people who wrote the bible.
Actually they are not. That is why these 'values' have always been met with rebellion and opposition.
Quote:In other words, evil is only that which opposes god, and good is only that which god permits. Too bad he isn't real and those values were recorded by morally backward people.
is this what you believe?
Quote:Nope, not a specific command, but a general and standing one.
to whom?
Quote:Spiritual war=kill people of other religions
actually no. Spiritual war means to fight your sin nature. again we (Meaning Christians) are not called to physically harm anyone. If you believe otherwise then show me book Chapter and verse that directs any Christianity to harm another.
Quote:You know, god hasn't told anyone to do anything for 2000+ years, so without a specific command, we cannot interpret his past words to mean anything. Doesn't that mean the whole bible is invalid by your logic?
How do you know what God has or has not said? You said that He does not exist. so doesn't that invalidate your question by your logic?
By My logic God has established a set of instructions in the bible, and has made promises to indewell all who ask, seek and knock as he has instructed. To which once God indwells a person said person receives direction from God directly. How do we know these are God's words? Because they conside with what has been written in the cannon of scripture.
Quote:Finding contradictions does not mean I have a flawed understanding, it means the bible is flawed.
which is exactly why i ask you to provide your 'contradictions' So that we shall see where the flaws are.
Quote:You, just said that we can't really understand it/our understanding is flawed and now you say we can understand it?
Not on your own
Quote:Funny, because some people on this forum were christian for decades before deconverting and never got any sign. You talk of seeking, asking, and knocking, but this is only a metaphor; a metaphor that you have repeatedly failed to define.
Have you asked for a defination?
Quote:The seeking and asking can be inferred, but what is this metaphorical knocking? How long must one wait after doing these things beforew they can understand anything?
We ask in prayer. Not petition but actual prayer. In Luke 11 where we are told we must knock we are also told how to pray. We seek in the bible, church, and in questions like this. We knock as the parable in luke 11 outlines. Meaning we repeat this process TILL we get what our Hearts have asked and sought after. (just like in the parable) Once you put a time frame on what or how you will ask and seek you wander from the perscribed path outlined in luke 11. Asking and seeking is less about the effort but the humlity it takes to wait and persue after God. One can go through the motions for 20 years and find nothing, or someone could start in an afternoon and have found God by the end of the day. It all depends on the heart doing the asking and seeking.
Quote:So what you expect me to believe is that traditional Jewish storytellers told two versions of a story that deliberately contradicted each other?
What I am expecting you to do is do your own reasearch. Then you will find the model of story telling I have left for you. In that stories are not told in chroniclogical order. They want to know the high points of the story and then the details. Kinda like wanting to see the 'previews' of a movie before deciding to listen.
Quote:You clearly don't understand, or else you would have explained it, rather than dodging the question (again).
Or perhaps you have asked the wrong question (again.) I answer only the questions you all ask. Once you are ready to know more you will ask for more (Just like with the bit on "ask seek and knock.") I did not explain it to you simply because you did not ask. To explain it before you were ready to hear it would have been a complete waist of time.
Quote:You know what, Drich? Why don't you go and learn everything the human race has ever learned from scratch. Don't read history books, go to the places where these events happened, do some archeology, and then give me your findings. Or better: look in the bible to confirm these. I could have found contradictions myself, or I could have posted a link to someone who already did. Which is more time efficient, and which will find more contradictions? The websites.
Then I could just as easily post a link to the answers.. Or do you honestly think that the major 'contradiction websites' have gone unanswered. I am only putting in the effort into this conversation that you yourself are willing to expend. If you can not be bothered to simply take what seems to be a contradiction to you and follow up with a simple google search, then why should I be bothered to blindly answer 1000 contradictions that you have little to no interest in. I simply askedyou to provide one or two absolute contradiction you felt that their was no comming back from... Or are you saying that you have put total faith in someone elses work to see you through your final judgement? Do you not see the irony in that? You have faith in a muslim website to help you determine your eternity, but no faith in God?
Quote:Maybe there is no conflict. Maybe you didn't do anything wrong, and the church has you brainwashed. That much is abundantly obvious to everyone here by now, I'm sure (except for you).
The church has nothing to do with this. Most churches do not care who asks questions in a bible class. In fact the one I was teaching encouraged it. That is why I fell into conflict.
Quote:Peers, as in plural. Not everyone agrees on what is right and wrong (allthough there are some basic points of agreement, such as murder, etc.). The golden rule is a good start for morality, likewise, it is good to determine if an action will hurt others/what will cause the greatest amount of happiness for the greatest number of people, etc. We are allowed to make moral choices, you are not.
Baaaaa
Quote:So, by sinning, you are able to be confident in your understanding of the bible?
Yes I am. As Paul was in romans 7 verse 7 through the end of the chapterhttp://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=Romans+7&version=NIV
In short he says we are all sin all of the time even after we have been saved (as he was when he wrote Romans 7)
Quote:In whoever made up god with such bad morals.
The fact that God has never lined up with our 'Morals' proves He is not of us.
Quote:Problem: people have self-esteem and a sense of self-worth. If they consider themselves to be anything more than dirty little sinners, they won't blindly follow us, begging for redemtion from a punishment we made up.
It seems you have confused church tradition with biblical Christianity.
Quote:But...god made the ten commandments. That was his understanding of morality.
That understanding is called Righteousness. Which was extended to include our thoughts and Heart felt desires in Mt 5. to further prove that 'self righteousness/morality' is not a valid standard in which to merrit eternal life.
That's just it. (Read this next part carfully) The bible is not Flawed. Our understanding of it is. These are the failures that people identify in the bible and attribute to God. When in fact the flaws are from our own understandings.
Sorry, I couldn't resist. I don't think any other response is appropriate at this point.(wait... I don't drink coffee)
For the Jews to live by. To show us we fail with our understanding of 'morality.'
![[Image: mban293l.jpg]](https://images.weserv.nl/?url=4.bp.blogspot.com%2F_uiGYtaa3X-4%2FTHQuzBl1p7I%2FAAAAAAAAB0E%2FQsFApLwoSwQ%2Fs400%2Fmban293l.jpg)
